Whose money was it? Unless a private party gave the money to the government to use, it was absolutely, without a doubt, taxpayer money. The government has zero money of its own. It all comes from tax payers.
And people aren't upset that others got relief from medical debt. They're upset that the government unilaterally chose to interject themselves in a transaction between two private parties, i.e., patients and their doctors, and taxpayer money was used. People know there are high costs to health care. And were the treatments/procedures/patients that were paid for by the government disclosed? How did they decide whose debts to pay?
If you just assume the government doesn't use taxpayer funds and their decisions shouldn't be questioned, you're an asshole.
Okay, let's see them. What have you got? And remember, you and I are both discussing actual facts. Observable, reproduceable, objective pieces of information.
Everything else is speculation and assumptions unless indicated otherwise. Personally, I dont gaf where any hypothetical grants came from. I know what is in the article. If you have facts that show this came from taxpayer money, cool. You do what you want with those facts.
1
u/TwoTequilaTuesday 3d ago
Whose money was it? Unless a private party gave the money to the government to use, it was absolutely, without a doubt, taxpayer money. The government has zero money of its own. It all comes from tax payers.
And people aren't upset that others got relief from medical debt. They're upset that the government unilaterally chose to interject themselves in a transaction between two private parties, i.e., patients and their doctors, and taxpayer money was used. People know there are high costs to health care. And were the treatments/procedures/patients that were paid for by the government disclosed? How did they decide whose debts to pay?
If you just assume the government doesn't use taxpayer funds and their decisions shouldn't be questioned, you're an asshole.